DA PROCESS REVIEW

January 2016

BACKGROUND • Willoughby City Council undertook a ‘Better Services Review’ in 2014. This

review led to a ‘Fit for the Future Improvement Program’ as of July 2015. One key improvement initiative identified as part of ‘Fit for the Future Improvement Program’ was the DA Process Improvement.

• New expectations from the NSW Department of Planning and Environment for: – increased digitisation of DA tracking information for display on the NSW Planning Portal and

– preparation for electronic DA lodgement and determination PROJECT OBJECTIVES

1. Review and document DA process 2. Increase digitisation 3. Reduce process and determination time 4. Maintain (or improve) satisfaction levels of DA

applicants 5. Improve consistency of assessment 2

KEY FACTS – Jan to Jun 2016

Overall applicant satisfaction post determination 73 % (up from 68 % 14/15)

Number DAs determined (excluding trees) 253

DAs – residential alterations & additions 167 (66%)

Number S96s determined 115

S96s – residential alterations & additions 89 (77%)

Average determination time – All DAs / S96 85 days

– residential alts & adds (DAs + S96)

79 days

- DA residential alts & adds 93 days

- S96 residential alts & adds 51 days

3

Comparison with other councils as published by Department of Planning

4

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15

Det

erm

inat

ion

tim

e (

day

s)

Year

Determination Time - Residential Alterations and Additions

Group 3 average

Leichhardt

Mosman

North Sydney

Sydney

Willoughby

14/15

Group 3 average 77

Leichhardt 97

Mosman 83

North Sydney 105

Sydney 88

Willoughby 76

Comparison with other councils as published by Department of Planning

5

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15

Det

erm

inat

ion

tim

e (

day

s)

Year

Determination Time - Residential Alterations and Additions

Group 3 average

Leichhardt

Mosman

North Sydney

Sydney

Willoughby

14/15

Group 3 average 77

Leichhardt 97

Mosman 83

North Sydney 105

Sydney 88

Willoughby 76

15/16 June-Dec ‘16

Alts & Adds (DAs)

86

< 70

Residential Alterations and Additions Average determination times by decision type Jan – June 2016

6

• Approved by Council – Number Determined: 3 Applications

– Average Processing Time: 206 Days

• Approved by Ward – Number Determined: 12 Applications

– Average Processing Time: 162 Days

• Approved by Staff under Delegation – Number Determined: 137 Applications

– Average Processing Time: 85 Days

VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER via ongoing online survey of all applicants of determined Development Applications (461 surveys completed of 2184 (21 %) surveys emailed since August 2013)

Request to “keep

the applicant more informed throughout the

process”

“ Long delay between

lodgement and communication of

issues “

“Explained what we

needed to do to have a trouble free DA at the pre

lodgement meeting ”

“Willing to negotiate”

“Good response time

to queries”

7

“

Council’s DCP is

ambiguous”

“Determination time is too long”

“Ward Council

process was disappointing”

Customer Survey (average during survey – all areas rated above 50%)

8

50.0% 55.0% 60.0% 65.0% 70.0% 75.0% 80.0%

The professional manner of the officer(s) pre-lodgement

The helpfulness of the officer(s) pre-lodgement

The professional manner of the assessment officer

The knowledge of the officer (s) pre-lodgement

The extent of information provided in pre-lodgementdiscussions

Response times to enquiries during the applicationprocessing

Ease of understanding application forms andaccompanying notes

How well informed during the process

The timeliness of the decision

Time taken for Council to request additionalinformation

Percentage satisfaction

Lowest satisfaction

Highest satisfaction

What we did?

• Mapped process

• Analysed customer feedback

• Analysed data – Time per process stage

– Reasons for additional information requests

– Development engineers time spent per task type

9

10

SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS No. Issue Description Recommendation (s)

1. Lengthy times for additional information requests to be sent to applicant. Average number of days before requests are sent out is 49. 3 of top 5 reasons for additional information are engineering related.

• Standardized assessment process with automatic prompting of key stages – not commenced (To be completed end June)

• Review of ‘Engineering referral’ team processes with consideration of duty officer – in progress (To be completed end March)

2. Significant amount of Development Engineers time is spent handling general enquiries. Development Engineers spend 25% of their time on general enquiries not related to current DAs they are dealing with.

• Improved website design and information

• KnowledgeBase articles should be prepared (or revised) - in progress (To be completed end June)

• Customer Service team should be retrained on engineering queries they can handle and which team to direct others to – not commenced (To be completed end June)

11

SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES & RECOMMENDATIONS (ctd) No. Issue Description Recommendation(s)

3. Inconsistent assessment processes resulting in some inconsistent determinations and time taken.

• Standardise assessment tables

• Standardise report templates - in progress (To be completed end June)

• Standardise peer review process

• Implement reporting of stages – (To be completed end June)

4. Lodgement of incomplete applications which resulted in longer than necessary assessment times.

• Ongoing resident workshops on DA process

• Additional information (predominantly engineering) provided at pre-lodgement meetings - To be completed end March)

• Additional checklists available (S96 and subdivision)

5 Lengthy times for applicants to return additional information. (average 48 days between request and receipt of additional information).

• Prompt to assessing officer on due date for additional information (To be completed end June)

• Sending “firm” reminder to applicants

• “Plain English” Eng. Req.s (To be completed end March) 12

Customer Journey Improvements based on feedback from applicants over past 3 years

Stage 2014 Current

Pre lodgement

Limited information online Improved online general information on development process. Searchable LEP and DCP Online investigate option for specific developments - In progress (To be completed end 2017)

Pre-lodgement meetings booked by phone

Able to book and pay online for meeting (set-up complete in Zipporah) – in progress (To be completed end June)

Lodgement 6 hardcopies of all documents required

Electronic copy + 3 hardcopies required

No guidelines provided on what to expect during assessment

Letter advising applicant “what to expect” during assessment and how to check progress via online tracker

13

Customer Journey

Stage 2014 Current

Lodgement No guidelines provided on what to expect during assessment (ctd)

• Workshops being run for prospective DA applicants

Notification Only property owners notified

Occupiers as well as owners notified

Assessment Minimal communication from assessment officer

Improved online application tracking Prompt advice of additional information requirements – in progress (To be completed end June)

Determination Determination documents provided via mail

All determination documents provided electronically

14

ESTIMATED BENEFITS

15

Type Estimation Status

Improved efficiency - electronic stamping

22 hrs pw

Improved efficiency - electronic signatures

768 applications x 0.25 hr = 192 hours pa

Initially trialling with tree removal applications

Community satisfaction increased – improved information online 24/7 (also reduces phone calls)

Not measured yet To measure with overall Council

customer satisfaction survey

Applicant satisfaction - reduced determination time

Slight increase Ongoing

Improved ability to meet ePlanning requirements from Dept Planning via online tracking and electronic signatures and stamping

Reduced time required to prepare for DOP changes in 2017

DOP Requirements have not been

clearly advised to date

Future stage reviews

• DCP controls for engineering matters with aim to simplify and reduce controls for residential low density areas (2017 –2018)

16